Speedy Merger in Doubt For E.M.S. and Fire Dept.

By JOE SEXTON

Published: October 11, 1995

The Giuliani administration's plan to merge the Fire Department and the Emergency Medical Service by the beginning of November appeared in doubt yesterday after City Hall officials determined that the City Charter must be revised before the plan goes forward.

While City Hall officials said yesterday that they were confident that they could gain the legal authority to bring about the merger on schedule, officials with the City Council, which would have to authorize the charter change, said the Giuliani administration was being unrealistic.

They said the Council had not received a detailed merger plan from the administration, and they predicted that hearings on a possible merger might not even be scheduled until next month.

As well, officials with the union representing E.M.S. workers, who have resisted the merger proposal, asserted that the Mayor could not make the charter change through the City Council and instead would have to win legislative approval or submit the issue to a referendum next fall. And they said they would consider challenging the administration in court if officials insisted on working only through the City Council.

"This is not done yet," said Tony Bernardo, president of the union for E.M.S. workers.

Whatever route is ultimately deemed necessary, the hearings, meetings and public debate that ensue would almost certainly complicate the administration's plan.

From his first weeks in office, Mr. Giuliani has talked about merging the city's ambulance service with the Fire Department as a way of saving money and responding more quickly to medical emergencies. Last spring administration officials spoke of the merger plan being "on the fast track."

Mr. Giuliani, noting that New York is one of the last major cities in the country to have separate ambulance and fire services, has argued that a merger will make both departments more productive.

To that end, for nearly a year firefighters have been trained in emergency medical care and have been responding to calls once exclusively handled by E.M.S. And within the last week, Fire Commissioner Howard Safir has spoken publicly about a plan for 59 "community-based ambulance stations" across the city. The ambulance stations would be housed in new or existing buildings, and not in firehouses.

But even the first, unofficial phase of the Mayor's proposed merger -- the use of firefighters to respond to critical medical emergencies -- has been the focus of controversy. Although leaders of the firefighters union have endorsed the merger plan, significant numbers of the city's more than 11,000 firefighters have made clear they are neither enthusiastic about nor comfortable with the added medical role.

"A lot of people out there want no part of this," said Thomas Von Essen, president of the Uniformed Firefighters Association. "But it's hard to get 11,000 people to agree on anything. The merger has to go forward."

Officials with the E.M.S. union have labeled the use of firefighters for critical medical care "a total failure," and they have sought to highlight what they say are the numerous mishaps resulting from the the care, or lack of care, given by firefighters.

Administration officials yesterday did not say precisely why they had concluded that a charter revision was required, and Paul J. Crotty, the city's corporation counsel, did not return phone calls for comment. But it is clear that the joining of the services would grant the Mayor direct control over an agency -- the ambulance service -- that had previously been under the supervision of the city's Health and Hospitals Corporation.

The City Council does have the authority to revise the City Charter on its own in certain limited instances. But whether the merger would constitute a shift in executive power that would require the approval of the State Legislature or a voter referendum is likely to be the subject of debate.

It would also substantially redefine the responsibilities of the city's firefighters, which are explicitly laid out in the City Charter.

Yesterday, city officials said they believed that their plan would succeed. "We have a detailed, explicit merger plan, and we believe the City Council shares our interests -- to give the people of the city less expensive, higher quality medical care," said Mr. Safir.

Asked if he feared a legal challenge to the way in which the Mayor gains the Charter revision, Mr. Safir said, "In this city, you can challenge a cheese sandwich. And people do."

Michael Clendenin, a spokesman for the Council, said there had been no substantive talks with the administration about the merger, and he said "it won't get done by Nov. 1."

Mr. Bernardo was also skeptical. "I don't know where the arrogance of Mr. Safir comes from," Mr. Bernardo said. "He and the Mayor are assuming the City Council is just going to do whatever they want them to, to revise the City Charter to satisfy the Mayor's whim. It sounds premature to me."